Como construir uma relação positiva com a crítica e a mídia na produção teatral?

I have worked on both sides of the table and have noticed again and again how randomly press releases and invitations were sent to the media, and how little research was done beforehand about which media preferred to report on what. In my experience, critics and the media love stories that are relevant to readers, listeners and viewers. These can be stories about the creation of a production, about individual characters on stage and about the artists who embody them. But also stories about the many different colleagues in sound, light, make-up, props, prompters as well as stage managers and assistants who help to make a good show a success.

Ground work is necessary when inviting any critic. It's primordial to match a critic to their domain of specialization. However, it might interesting to get a person from another place because a neutral opinion sometimes is just what we just might need.

It is important to develop smooth communication skills. Sometimes the most talented people lack the appropriate media and/or skills to convey the message they have.

In my opinion engaging them with respect, open communication and transparency. Critics and media are always harder on those that try to hide things.

It is important to understand that the opinion of the critic on our shows is just that, their opinion, I don't take it personally, it is not about me as a person but about the piece. I try to be polite, thank them for their work and move on. I have work to do!

i always acknowlege the feedback either positive or not. I appreciate the fact that i have been able to engage someone and that they have an opinion on what i am doing. I review the review and decide if it is something that will benefit the process in the way i intend to develop the product. If i can use the advise for my advantage and my intent i consider it and if not i just continue along the path i have chosen for my project as it is mine and i do make the final decisions about the direction to choose.

You may not always receive the feedback you were hoping for. I personally was in stage productions for 11 years. It helps to have a clean cast free from civil issues that can bring any negative impact on your reviews. Media will retract their statements if something that was posted is unfounded. Remember they obtain most of their info from interviewing others. When receiving excellent reviews, extend a thank you. If they personally attended the show and didn’t like it, reach out for a creative input.

Regarding performances couldn't be more different between media and theater makers. We look at the process, at details that develop in rehearsals and that change until the premiere, and which are mostly not noticeable to a critic. We are trained differently, and so are critics, who have a completely different professional development, and who see our ideas as results that have to correspond to their taste and to their ideas about artistic work - or not. They also look differently at acting and the performance of actors. But we must recognize that they have great power over an artistic breakthrough that is subject to their subjective discretion. The reconciliation of both approaches can only be achieved through discussions and openness.

Das ist ein sehr interessantes Thema, dem ich u. a. als Musiktheater-Kritiker seit Jahren als Herausforderung ausgesetzt bin. Ich finde interessant und auch neu, dass in diesem Post die völlig unterschiedliche Sichtweise von Produzierenden und Rezipierenden betont wird. Als Kulturjournalist möchte ich zu bedenken geben: In den Institutionen besteht die Tendenz, durch zunehmend aufgeblasene Marketing-Abteilungen die eigenen Wahrheiten und Wirklichkeiten sprachlich fest zu branden. Dieser Sprech der Institutionen ist sehr stark geworden - gerade Macher akzeptieren das gerne und kennen oft gar nichts anderes mehr. Aber Theaterschaffende müssen immer die strukturelle Abgeschlossenheit ihrer Welt und ihrer Kunstsprache immer wieder bedenken.

Trust in this sense comes after you have established some sort of creative credibility. There after, your audience, consumers or clients Trust in your ideas, work or projects. Your uniqueness is what builds up Trust. However, the essence of Trust and rapport is its maintenance. How?? By being inventive and dynamic.

If you have ongoing productions and you build a relationship with the media, they will continue to be faithful supporters. As they say.. the show must go on! It helps to thank them for coming out. Acknowledge them before or after the show.

As theatre makers we need to remain mindful of the difference between reviewers, the media, versus feedback from audiences and colleagues. The first is necessary in selling our shows, our visibility, good reviews lift our standing in the external world, and being open and polite, thanking them for coming out to see your show, is key. We need them, they are part of our wheel. But the feedback we get from our audiences and colleagues is often more helpful, as they are not about giving a thumbs up or down. It's the shorthand judgment that is not helpful, but ongoing conversations with our audiences and colleagues is inspiring and thereby helps us become better artists.

Critics and media love your narrative about the success or failure of a theater production. It's not about presenting the results pure and 1:1, but rather finding intelligent and humble forms of communication that are unobtrusive but still highlight the essential results. Don't try to cover up failure, but face criticism when a production fails and, above all, what you learned from these failures and what will influence the success of future productions . Don't inspire critics with your successes or failure, but rather with the way you deal with them and what you learn from them for the future. That should be the core of your narrative in communication with critiques and media.

Blackmail? Bribery? At the end of the day, they either like your work or they don’t, except the ones who like bits then rant on about the rest of it. They make it or they break it? Less than used to be the case, but there you are, you’ve invested time, energy, money, hours and hours working with an editor, getting let down, having crew go sick and then you proudly present your work and what happens? A film critic gets hold of it. I’m mindful of someone writing a critic of Black Star by Bowie. They didn’t much like it then he died and they rewrote it and whilst I’ve forgotten their name, everyone knows Bowie. Then there are projects that get flagged and slagged off yet turn into Cult classics. And?? Easy! Let them criticise your best.